For Amber Waves of Grain!....and Debt!

Today the House and Senate passed an irresponsible debt-ceiling plan that raises the debt limit by $2.4 trillion from $14.3 trillion, taking our debt-ceiling well above 100% of our GDP for the first time since World War II. It makes a meager savings of $2.1 trillion over 10 years. With the current deficit at about $1.7 trillion, that means the debt will more than double in 10 years – adding nearly $15 trillion. The numbers do not add up folks. These cuts aren’t even real cuts; they are cuts from future planned expenditures. My questions are three-fold. First, what are we gaining from these increased expenditures? One would suspect that Obama’s trillion dollar spending spree and a doubling of the national debt over the last 10 years would at least yield short term results that affect the everyday American. Second, how can we be expected to pay back our debts? Third, what can be done in the future?

Americans have gained nothing from this spending spree. Unemployment has been slowly increasing again and now stands at 9.2% and the economy, bailouts and all, is growing at a meager 1.3%. Many economists fear that a double-dip recession is inevitable at this point. Much like the education system, throwing more money at the economy will not help. Attitudes and confidence within our government must be restored. Raising the debt ceiling does the exact opposite! It sends the message that we have no idea how to control our spending and don’t really care. The government is like an alcoholic in denial!

Ron Paul hit the nail on the head a few weeks ago. He said that our debt was so huge that no matter what we do, we will default without radical shifts in policy TODAY. We will default either by not paying our debts at some point in the future or simply by paying them by printing more money, thereby making the dollars paid back all but worthless!

Surprisingly, a practical solution is not as painful as we think. Our current revenue stream is about $2.2 trillion. The last $2.2 trillion budget was only a few years ago in 2004. Why can’t we simply go back to those funding levels and balance the budget? What spending items have come about in the last 7 years that are so vital to protect? Perhaps those are questions worth asking your Congressman. Somehow I do not think projects like the $2.6 million grant spent by the National Institute of Health to make sure Chinese prostitutes drink less are worthwhile.

Congress acted the way it did out of fear. Not fear of defaulting, but fear of the political ramifications. Like I said in my post “Ditch the Party,” political parties are first and foremost looking to protect their own hide. The “Debt Crisis of 1995,” which wasn’t a crisis at all, proved that when push comes to shove we can live under the cap. The debt ceiling was reached in the fall of 1995 and was not raised until the following March. President Clinton simply cut where he could and shifted monies appropriately between various funds to ensure that all our bills were paid and services rendered. Rather than coming up with a rational plan, Obama chose to give a bunch of worthless speeches filled with half truths about starving seniors and defaulting to create fear - and enough Americans bought it. He framed the issue well enough that a lack of a deal was to be mostly blamed on the Republicans, at least that is what polling suggests (not that Obama’s was terribly good either). Of course, Speaker Boehner and Republicans caved out of party interest rather than be the good vertebrates they should be. National interest simply took a back seat today.

Today, America saw a fork in the road and went the wrong way. If we have any hope to save our children and grandchildren’s future, the debate must now be centered on cutting the debt – not just the deficit. In 10 years our debt will be near 200% GDP. That is beyond the breaking point. Whether or not we have little spending items that we like, we must all realize the harsh reality that this is unsustainable (unless your ultimate goal is bankruptcy). I am sure that the Democrats will now try to shift our attention away from this blunder by focusing on ending DOMA or some other irrelevant social issue they generally prey upon. The Republicans too will try and avoid this issue as to not seem spineless going into the 2012 elections. As is the way in Washington, this will be swept under the rug. American’s are notorious for their short-term memory loss with regards to politics. If our country is to survive, that habit must end today!

"Silence in the face of tyranny is cowardice at best, treasonous at worse." - Abe Lincoln

Gay Marriage, Catfish & Apples, and “Radical Acceptionalism”

Recently, Gay Marriage has passed in New York State. As a Yank, I am disgusted by the lack of spine the NYS Senate GOP showed as they passed this measure. As a Christian I am appalled. As a libertarian-leaning conservative, I have to think this one over and remedy my feelings on the issue with my political philosophy that government should not do anything to control or subjugate people.

Homosexuals have been, and continue to be, free to conduct their affairs as they see fit, just like everyone else. As Americans, it is a fundamental right to pursue happiness as we deem fit. For some, this means breaking the norm – a norm informally set by society and its extra-governmental values [traditions]. Gays are not precluded from breaking these norms and pursuing their own happiness. That is the bottom line.

Questions now arise regarding the purpose of marriage. Is marriage a right? Is the purpose of marriage to assist in the pursuit of happiness? If the answer to either question is “yes,” gay marriage must be permitted. However, this is not the case. First and foremost, marriage is not a “right.” Rights are endowed by our creator and marriage isn’t one of them. If marriage is a right, I want government to provide me with the bride I am entitled to if I am not hitched by 30!

Secondly, government marriage has nothing to do with happiness. The God of Abraham, Jesus Christ, Buddha, etc, and their respective Churches and Temples care if you are happy with your marriage, not government. Government marriage and its tax and healthcare related benefits are issued only to ensure a suitable environment for the creation of new life. Government cares about this because a suitable environment for child rearing means couples will have more children, thereby creating a stable or increasing labor force, ensure population stability, and hopefully provide an environment that will yield the scientists and engineers of tomorrow.

I oppose homosexual marriage because homosexual unions do not grant society this benefit. Last I checked, homosexuals cannot create life. How can we call two unions equal if the fundamental groundwork for the union is vastly different? I love fried catfish and I love apples, but I would never compare the two or call fried catfish an apple. If this changes down the line, whether by Darwinian evolution or the Hand of God, I will revisit my conclusion. Perhaps marriage has changed from the days of mom & apple pie, but if it is no longer about creating a family – perhaps government should abolish the institution all together and save its money.

Another aspect to this struggle is one of ideological dominance. Government must treat all life-guiding principles as a religion and enforcing them on another is always wrong. Secularism IS a religion. Under the various guises of women’s rights, reproductive health, marriage equality, and the ACLU – secularism is a poison that seeks to subjugate the masses through social engineering. It seeks to eliminate other value systems, including extra-governmental norms, through a systematic attack through the mediums of government under the false banner of tolerance.

Allowing gays, or anyone for that matter, to live life as they see fit despite ones own reservations is tolerance. Thrusting a value system upon a populous is radical “acceptionalism” (meaning forced acceptance) and is the epitome of intolerance. Gay marriage seeks to thrust a new value system upon society and meticulously dismantle the extra-governmental values that society generally is guided by. Although gay marriage is not the be-all and end-all of this process, it is a mile marker.

With that, I must commend the 41 states that have either constitution bans on same-sex marriage or have laws restricting marriage to one man and one woman.

As a side note, I would not rule out statutorily strengthening contracts delegating inheritance rights and end of life decisions to a same-sex partner for that security is fundamental to the pursuit of happiness and it is ones right to delegate it as such.

Bottom line: Marriage is not a right, state marriage it is not solely meant for the purpose of happiness, gay marriage is biologically different than heterosexual marriage and therefore not comparable nor can it be equated, and gay marriage is part of the great war this country faces against secularism. Do not let the guise of tolerance cloud your judgment in the face of this intolerance.

“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” – Abe Lincoln

Ditch the Party

George Washington warned in his Farewell Address:

"[Political Parties] serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests."

It is not a shocking revelation to report that political parties, time and time again, flip-flop on basic issues to serve their own needs rather than doing what is good for the country. And if they act for the good of the country, rest assured it is only for some type of self-gain.

Who can forget Nancy Pelosi’s “pay as you go” budgeting strategy? That philosophy lasted until the second she got in power and needed to serve her party interests before the national interest. What about the PATRIOT Act? The staunch Democratic opposition in the latter Bush years suddenly turned into staunch support in 2010. What about the Civil Rights Act of 1957 supported by Republicans and opposed by Senate Majority Leader Lyndon B. Johnson and the Democrats? Rather than protect the oppressed black community with a strong bill in 1957, he waited until 1964 when it was politically convenient and his party was in power. Suddenly, Democrats magically become the strong voice for “oppressed minorities.”

Let’s not pick on only the Democrats, the Republicans are no better. The most blatant example being the spend-drunk, yet fiscally responsible, Republicans of the Bush years. It’s even more amusing that they now claim to be born-again fiscal conservatives who wouldn’t dare revert to the Bush years if given the opportunity. We’ll have to see how that plays out.

Political parties not only put their own interest ahead of the national interest, but they actively seek to subjugate the masses with their own brand of “kool-aid.” Democrats actively seek out ignorant teens, minorities, and urban women while Republicans pander to ignorant white men and rural folk.

I will no longer subjugate myself to any party. I am a conservative and only conservatives will get my vote. Give me more liberty, or I will vote third party. I will no longer vote for a lesser of two evils.

The Great Capitulator Strikes Again!

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, will be tried at Guantanamo Bay and not blocks away from the scene of his crime. After wasting time, money, and making us look stupid - at least Obama has succumb to reason and we can finally have this animal tried and convicted.

Once again, Obama is scurrying to sweep major issues and lapses in judgment under the carpet before election time. I only hope that American’s do not forget gaffes such as this, as we tend to do with our political short-term memory.

Pass it Along...

Obama's Great Guantanamo Capitulation

To the pleasure of Republicans and Independents and to the dissatisfaction of liberals, Obama has broken yet another campaign promise. Despite promising to close Guantanamo Bay within his first year in office, the administration is now opting to lift the 2-year freeze on military tribunals as well as reinstating the ability to detain terrorists without formal charges.

It is hard to disguise the fact that Mr Obama's lofty ambitions have been in a two-year-long collision with the nation. All attempts to bring terrorists to U.S. soil have been met with stiff opposition and have utterly failed. National security has been given a back seat to ideology, and Americans retaliated. While this capitulation is humiliating for Obama, it is necessary to eliminate this potentially hazardous campaign issue. I suspect we will see more “sticky issues” dealt with in order to clear the table for the campaign.

US and Mexico reach proposed deal over trucking dispute

Once again, oddly, I must applaud the Obama Administration for ending this 20 year feud. US and Mexican carriers were authorized to cross the border under the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement, but the US has refused to allow Mexican trucks access over concerns of their ability to meet US safety and environmental standards.This resulted in harsh retaliatory tariffs on US products from Mexico.

And end to these archaic tariffs will promote jobs on both sides of the border and open up a viable US market that will bring much needed growth at home. The administration hope to send an official deal to Congress by spring.